Rating the certainty in evidence in the absence of a single estimate of effect.

Evidence-Based Medicine Pub Date : 2017-06-01 Epub Date: 2017-03-20 DOI:10.1136/ebmed-2017-110668
M Hassan Murad, Reem A Mustafa, Holger J Schünemann, Shahnaz Sultan, Nancy Santesso
{"title":"Rating the certainty in evidence in the absence of a single estimate of effect.","authors":"M Hassan Murad,&nbsp;Reem A Mustafa,&nbsp;Holger J Schünemann,&nbsp;Shahnaz Sultan,&nbsp;Nancy Santesso","doi":"10.1136/ebmed-2017-110668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When studies measure or report outcomes differently, it may not be feasible to pool data across studies to generate a single effect estimate (ie, perform meta-analysis). Instead, only a narrative summary of the effect across different studies might be available. Regardless of whether a single pooled effect estimate is generated or whether data are summarised narratively, decision makers need to know the certainty in the evidence in order to make informed decisions. In this guide, we illustrate how to apply the constructs of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the certainty in evidence when a meta-analysis has not been performed and data were summarised narratively.</p>","PeriodicalId":12182,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":"22 3","pages":"85-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmed-2017-110668","citationCount":"320","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2017-110668","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 320

Abstract

When studies measure or report outcomes differently, it may not be feasible to pool data across studies to generate a single effect estimate (ie, perform meta-analysis). Instead, only a narrative summary of the effect across different studies might be available. Regardless of whether a single pooled effect estimate is generated or whether data are summarised narratively, decision makers need to know the certainty in the evidence in order to make informed decisions. In this guide, we illustrate how to apply the constructs of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the certainty in evidence when a meta-analysis has not been performed and data were summarised narratively.

在没有对效果进行单一估计的情况下对证据的确定性进行评级。
当研究测量或报告的结果不同时,将所有研究的数据集中起来以产生单一效果估计(即进行荟萃分析)可能是不可行的。相反,可能只有对不同研究的影响进行叙述性总结。无论是否产生单一的综合效应估计,或者是否对数据进行叙述总结,决策者都需要知道证据的确定性,以便做出明智的决策。在本指南中,我们说明了如何应用GRADE(推荐、评估、发展和评估分级)方法的结构来评估证据的确定性,当没有进行荟萃分析并且数据是叙述性总结时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信